That's why we have tests! I just changed the activity and saw that we have
one failure. I'm not sure why this test in particular is failing, since
there's too many assertions in one method, so I'll have to try and debug it
today.
The thing is that if we're deprecating something and replacing it with
something else, we should write tests for it. Releasing a 4.0.x and
changing how we embed a WebView by changing class names but not fixing up
the deprecation is bizzare.
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 7:15 AM Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> wrote:
> I wanted to make sure that I didn't break the old way of doing things.
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The main issue is that this isn't documented anywhere, and this is
> > necessary for people to use a Third Party WebView. Also, why didn't you
> > bother updating the test with the new API?
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 5:19 PM Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Here's an example:
> > >
> > > ConfigXmlParser parser = new ConfigXmlParser();
> > > parser.parse(activity);
> > > webView.init(cordova, parser.getPluginEntries(),
> > parser.getPreferences());
> > >
> > > Feel free to iterate if you think the API is too obtuse, but I think
> it's
> > > good to allow a file-less mode, and to allow different WebViews to have
> > > different settings.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Do you have an example of how this would work? This seems to be a lot
> > > more
> > > > complex than it needs to be.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 5:05 PM Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > It's so that you can have multiple CordovaWebViews that use
> different
> > > > > configs within one application. It's also so that you don't have to
> > > have
> > > > a
> > > > > config.xml if you prefer to build up your config in code instead.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think loadConfig() is deprecated. It has
> > > > > a @SuppressWarnings("deprecation"), which just silences a warning
> > > about
> > > > it
> > > > > setting the config of the Config class (which is done for backwards
> > > > > compatibility).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > OK, this actually makes using the WebView as a component a lot
> > > harder,
> > > > > > since you now have to have this loadConfig method which you also
> > > marked
> > > > > for
> > > > > > deprecation required to get all of the necessary attributes out
> of
> > > > this.
> > > > > > I'm pretty sure this is a major step backwards in that people
> > looking
> > > > to
> > > > > > use Cordova as a component now have to jump through additional
> > hoops
> > > to
> > > > > get
> > > > > > this to work. What is the benefit of deprecating the Config
> static
> > > > class
> > > > > > and replacing it with the ConfigXmlParser again? I don't remember
> > why
> > > > > this
> > > > > > was done.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:04 AM Andrew Grieve <
> agri...@chromium.org
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 7:39 AM Andrew Grieve <
> > > agri...@chromium.org
> > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You can now instantiate a CordovaWebView without a
> > config.xml,
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > without
> > > > > > > > > using Config. This happened when I added an "init()" method
> > to
> > > > > > > > > CordovaWebView. You can pass in a CordovaPreferences
> object,
> > > and
> > > > a
> > > > > > list
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > PluginEntry. Maybe we just need a better comment on Config
> > > saying
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > use
> > > > > > > > > these instead?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Where does one get this PluginEntry list when they're
> > embedding a
> > > > > > > WebView?
> > > > > > > > This needs to be documented or at least put in the test that
> > > tests
> > > > > this
> > > > > > > use
> > > > > > > > case.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > That has nothing to do with InAppBrowser, this is to do
> > with
> > > > > > > embedding
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > WebView inside an Android application. I don't think you
> > > > > understand
> > > > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > mean when I say the embedded use case.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Maybe try explaining a bit more?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Even though you edited the test that explicitly covers this
> > use,
> > > > > case,
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > even though we've talked about using CordovaWebView as an
> > Android
> > > > > View
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > over a year, you need it explained more?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So, not everyone wants to use all of Cordova, for many
> reasons.
> > > > > > Instead,
> > > > > > > > they really just want to take advantage of the WebView
> > component
> > > in
> > > > > > their
> > > > > > > > native apps so that they can create hybrid apps that are
> mostly
> > > > > native
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > only some parts that use Cordova. This is where you would
> > > declare
> > > > > your
> > > > > > > > view in your layout XML like this:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > <org.apache.cordova.engine.SystemWebView
> > > > > > > > android:id="@+id/WebViewComponent"
> > > > > > > > android:layout_width="match_parent"
> > > > > > > > android:layout_height="match_parent">
> > > > > > > > </org.apache.cordova.engine.SystemWebView>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > And then, in the activity start up your view like this:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > private CordovaWebView webInterface;
> > > > > > > > private CordovaInterfaceImpl systemInterface = new
> > > > > > > > CordovaInterfaceImpl(this);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > //Set up the webview
> > > > > > > > SystemWebView webView = (SystemWebView)
> > > > > > > > findViewById(R.id.WebViewComponent);
> > > > > > > > webInterface = new CordovaWebViewImpl(this, new
> > > > > > > > SystemWebViewEngine(webView));
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Config.init();
> > > > > > > > webInterface.init(systemInterface,
> > > > > Config.getPluginEntries(),
> > > > > > > > Config.getPreferences());
> > > > > > > > webView.loadUrl(Config.getStartUrl());
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Right now, we're getting the configuration from the Config
> > class,
> > > > > > because
> > > > > > > > we at least have access to this. If we don't have this, how
> do
> > > > > people
> > > > > > > get
> > > > > > > > access to the list of plugin entries specified in Config.xml?
> > > I'm
> > > > > > pretty
> > > > > > > > sure we still want to support this feature.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Does that make sense?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I gotcha. So, I think the answer is to use ConfigXmlParser() to
> > > > extract
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > information required by init. You shouldn't need the call
> > > > Config.init()
> > > > > > at
> > > > > > > all.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
